Beirut Lebanon

In Crisis Moments, Should An American President Resign, As Reckless Republicans Are Suggesting? Of Course Not!

Ronald 13 Comments

Think of how many times a crisis has arisen in American history during an administration of innumerable Presidents!

Should James Madison have resigned as he fled the capital as the British invaded Washington, DC  in August 1814 during the War of 1812?

Should Abraham Lincoln have resigned when various times in the Civil War the Confederacy won major military battles from 1861-1863?

Should Franklin D. Roosevelt have resigned when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941?

Should John F. Kennedy have resigned when Russian missiles were discovered in Cuba in 1962?

Should Ronald Reagan have resigned after the loss of 252 Marines in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1983, due to Islamic terrorism?

Should George W. Bush have resigned after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon by Al Qaeda?

In these and innumerable other situations, of course the answer is NO!

But now, suddenly, reckless Republicans want Barack Obama to resign due to the Paris terror attacks, which they blame Obama for, even though ISIL (ISIS) is the outgrowth of the disastrous and unnecessary Iraq War waged by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

This demand for resignation occurred after “Jihadi John”, who slaughtered foreign hostages by knife, including Americans; and a leading figure in ISIL (ISIS) in Libya, were killed by American air strikes, but before the tragic Paris terror attacks, as if the Republicans have s simple answer to the threat of Islamic terrorism!

So in a crisis moment, the nation should rally around the President, as is typical in most cases historically.  But even when not unifying around the President, no leader should bow to political attacks, and instead go to work and face the crises that arise, as so many Presidents have done throughout American history!

IF Hillary Clinton Chooses Not To Run For President, Elizabeth Warren Goes To The Head Of The Class!

Ronald Leave a comment

2016 is clearly a year for a woman candidate to be taken seriously for the White House, and everyone figures that is Hillary Clinton.

But despite indications that she plans to run, as hinted at in campaigning for Virginia gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe , it is clear that the attacks on her would be brutal if she ran, particularly on the overinflated manner of Benghazi, Libya, the tragic loss of the ambassador and three others on September 11, 2012. The fact that Ronald Reagan presided over the loss of 252 Marines in Beirut, Lebanon in 1983, is simply overlooked, while the loss of four people is made out to be the crime of the century, while certainly it is a tragic manner.

It could be said that Hillary has problems with her long career, as any one with her experience would have, but it could be that she will, ultimately, decide that at the age of 69 in 2016, she would rather have a life as a lecturer and author, and a new grandmother by that time.

So IF she chose not to run, it would seem clear the Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has inspired many by her strong stands on consumer affairs and so many other matters, would then decide to run, and would excite the base.

And if not her, further behind are New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, both exceptional women, who might join the race.

It is clear that there will be a female candidate on the Democratic side of the Presidential race, even if Hillary Clinton ultimately bows out of the race for the White House!